IS MENTAL HEALTH RESPONSIBLE FOR ANGER OUTBURSTS AND ULTIMATELY HYPERTENSION?

Objectives: To explore the relationship of depression, anxiety, and stress (mental health) with anger dimensions and to study that if these mental states predict hypertension disease? Methodology: Cross-sectional research design was used in the current research. Data was collected from 3 public sector hospitals of Lahore from May 15, 2019 to September 30, 2019. Sample of (N = 240) consecutive hypertensive patients with Mage 43.0707 ± 7.99 were recruited. Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995), and State Trait Anger Expression Inventory (Spielberger, 1988) were used for data collection. Descriptive statistics, logistic regression, and independent samples t-test were carried on for data analyses. Results: Significant positive correlation of depression, anxiety, and stress with anger dimensions was explore. Depression appeared as predictors of state anger, trait anger, anger in, anger control, and total anger (p<0.05). Anxiety emerged as predictor of state anger, trait anger, anger in, anger control, and total anger and stress as predictor of state anger, trait anger, anger in, anger control, and total anger. Significant gender differences appeared in depression, anxiety, stress, state anger, trait anger, anger in, anger control, and total anger (p<0.05). Conclusion: Depression, anxiety, and stress have a significant relationship with anger and hypertension disease.

Working memory guidance of visual attention to threat in offenders

Aggression and trait anger have been linked to attentional biases toward angry faces and attribution of hostile intent in ambiguous social situations. Memory and emotion play a crucial role in social-cognitive models of aggression but their mechanisms of influence are not fully understood. Combining a memory task and a visual search task, this study investigated the guidance of attention allocation toward naturalistic face targets during visual search by visual working memory (WM) templates in 113 participants who self-reported having served a custodial sentence. Searches were faster when angry faces were held in working memory regardless of the emotional valence of the visual search target. Higher aggression and trait anger predicted increased working memory modulated attentional bias. These results are consistent with the Social-Information Processing model, demonstrating that internal representations bias attention allocation to threat and that the bias is linked to aggression and trait anger.

Workplace Ostracism and Counterproductive Work Behaviors: The Chain Mediating Role of Anger and Turnover Intention

This study aims to explore the mediating effect of anger and turnover intention on the relationship between workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behaviors. A two-stage follow-up survey of 426 employees born after 1990 was conducted using the Workplace Ostracism Scale, Counterproductive Work Behaviors Scale, Trait Anger subscale of the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory, and Turnover Intention Scale. Workplace ostracism was found to be significantly positively correlated with anger, turnover intention, and counterproductive work behaviors. Furthermore, anger and turnover intention both separately and serially mediated the relationship between workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behaviors. This study confirms the chain mediating effect of anger and turnover intention on the relationship between workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behaviors.

The Contribution of Cognitive Impulsivity to Criminal Risk

<p>Impulsivity increases risk for general, violent and sexual offending. Accordingly, helping offenders to become better regulators of their impulses is one goal of offender rehabilitation. In a correctional setting, the assessment of impulsivity focuses on personality and behaviour, but not cognition; cognitive impulse control impairments are inferred from personality styles and behavioural patterns suggestive of acting before thinking. However, empirical findings challenge the validity of inferring cognition from personality and behavioural measures. Additionally, without assessing cognition, practitioners are limited in their ability to isolate which cognitive processes are most impaired and therefore worthy of intervention for individual offenders. To establish the contribution of cognitive impulse control to criminal risk, a theoretically derived, empirically supported neurocognitive assessment framework was adopted. The framework is based on the notion that impulsive behaviour arises from three, potentially dissociable skill domains that support impulse control: decisionmaking, perceptual and motor impulse control. A cohort of 77 men attending intensive cognitive-behavioural rehabilitation was recruited from four of New Zealand’s prison-based Special Treatment Unit Rehabilitation Programmes (STURPs). A neurocognitive battery of five tasks collectively representing each cognitive impulse control domain was administered before and after the 8-month treatment programme. Study One explored pre-treatment clinically impaired performance within and across each cognitive impulse control domain. Compared to normative data, performance was typically in the average to below average range, but it was not clinically impaired overall. When performance was clinically impaired, it was most pronounced on tasks requiring cognitive flexibility. Study Two explored treatment change in cognitive impulse control. The study also compared pre-treatment cognitive impulse control between offenders who went on to complete the treatment programme and those who were prematurely removed for responsivity or conduct-related issues. No pre-treatment cognitive impulse control differences were found between treatment completers and non-completers. Treatment completers displayed small pre-post treatment improvements in some areas of cognitive impulse control, but not others. Study Three explored cross-sectional and predictive relationships between cognitive impulse control, dynamic criminal risk, trait anger and anger control. Although there was little association between these variables before treatment, some cognitive impulse control outcomes predicted post-treatment dynamic criminal risk, trait anger and anger control. Thus, the evidence suggested that certain aspects of cognitive impulse control might function as facilitators of treatment change. Together, the findings highlighted the importance of evaluating cognitive impulse control as part of the risk assessment, and clinical formulation process. The findings also suggested that interventions designed to develop cognitive impulse control abilities either before, or as a complement to traditional cognitive-behavioural interventions, have the potential to maximise treatment response.</p>

The Contribution of Cognitive Impulsivity to Criminal Risk

<p>Impulsivity increases risk for general, violent and sexual offending. Accordingly, helping offenders to become better regulators of their impulses is one goal of offender rehabilitation. In a correctional setting, the assessment of impulsivity focuses on personality and behaviour, but not cognition; cognitive impulse control impairments are inferred from personality styles and behavioural patterns suggestive of acting before thinking. However, empirical findings challenge the validity of inferring cognition from personality and behavioural measures. Additionally, without assessing cognition, practitioners are limited in their ability to isolate which cognitive processes are most impaired and therefore worthy of intervention for individual offenders. To establish the contribution of cognitive impulse control to criminal risk, a theoretically derived, empirically supported neurocognitive assessment framework was adopted. The framework is based on the notion that impulsive behaviour arises from three, potentially dissociable skill domains that support impulse control: decisionmaking, perceptual and motor impulse control. A cohort of 77 men attending intensive cognitive-behavioural rehabilitation was recruited from four of New Zealand’s prison-based Special Treatment Unit Rehabilitation Programmes (STURPs). A neurocognitive battery of five tasks collectively representing each cognitive impulse control domain was administered before and after the 8-month treatment programme. Study One explored pre-treatment clinically impaired performance within and across each cognitive impulse control domain. Compared to normative data, performance was typically in the average to below average range, but it was not clinically impaired overall. When performance was clinically impaired, it was most pronounced on tasks requiring cognitive flexibility. Study Two explored treatment change in cognitive impulse control. The study also compared pre-treatment cognitive impulse control between offenders who went on to complete the treatment programme and those who were prematurely removed for responsivity or conduct-related issues. No pre-treatment cognitive impulse control differences were found between treatment completers and non-completers. Treatment completers displayed small pre-post treatment improvements in some areas of cognitive impulse control, but not others. Study Three explored cross-sectional and predictive relationships between cognitive impulse control, dynamic criminal risk, trait anger and anger control. Although there was little association between these variables before treatment, some cognitive impulse control outcomes predicted post-treatment dynamic criminal risk, trait anger and anger control. Thus, the evidence suggested that certain aspects of cognitive impulse control might function as facilitators of treatment change. Together, the findings highlighted the importance of evaluating cognitive impulse control as part of the risk assessment, and clinical formulation process. The findings also suggested that interventions designed to develop cognitive impulse control abilities either before, or as a complement to traditional cognitive-behavioural interventions, have the potential to maximise treatment response.</p>

Trait Anger Cause Risky Driving Behavior by Influencing Executive Function and Hazard Cognition

Road rage is a serious phenomenon around the world in the driving context and may contribute to risky driving behavior, further increasing the probability of collisions. Among several factors, trait anger is the most relevant variable towards road rage. This research aims to interpret how trait anger influences risky driving behavior in detail. We used an online questionnaire, which contains trait anger scale (TAS), executive function index (EFI), hazard cognition scale (HCS; represents attitudes towards risky driving behavior), driver behavior questionnaire (DBQ), and self-reported traffic violations (e.g., accidents, penalty points, fines). The linear regression model showed that trait anger is a medium but statistically significant predictor of risky driving behavior and drivers’ attitude towards risky situations can significantly predict risky driving behavior in statistics up to medium effect. But risky driving behavior cannot be predicted by executive function. Interestingly, for the objective indicators, the zero-inflated Poisson regression or negative binomial regression results suggested that age is a small protective factor towards accidents/penalty points/fines, and trait anger also is a small protective factor in accidents/fines. While executive function alleviates penalty points and fines, whereas hazard cognition alleviates penalty points only. They all represented a small effect on risky driving behavior. Path analysis suggested that trait anger influences risky driving behavior through executive function and hazard cognition. This study provides a theoretical framework for further research about road rage and offers some possible intervene towards road rage.

Estimating training effects for private security guards using trait anger, anger expression and stress coping levels

BACKGROUND: Professionally, private security guards are expected to successfully manage their anger and stress. OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose of this study is to determine stress and anger levels of private security guards working in the Ankara Electricity, Gas and Bus Operations Organization. The secondary aim of this research is to determine the effectiveness of the training program given to private security guards within the scope of anger and stress control. The effects of training on 690 private security guards who participated in the training program was investigated. METHODS: In the first part of the study, the validity and reliability of the Trait Anger, Anger Expression Scale and Coping with Stress Scale were investigated, and in the second part, the effectiveness of training given to 690 private security guards was examined. Also, as a comparison group, 201 private security guards who did not participate in training were reached and the scales were applied. RESULTS: The results showed that private security guards had an inability to cope with stress and anger was triggered easily. The average treatment effect was E[Y(1) Y(0)| X] = –0.111 and this was statistically significant. This shows that training had a significant effect on anger. Anger decreased when stress-coping behaviours increased and the training was effective. CONCLUSIONS: It is important that training about anger and stress control should be given to security forces at regular intervals.